The match-up of the year is Saturday, if you believe the media-hype, only three weeks into the season when Ohio State travels to USC for the "collision in the Coliseum." Yes, like snowstorms and other weather disasters, this one even has a name. I know you'll be surprised to find out that I just don't get it.
I don't get the love affair with either school, especially the current one with Ohio State. You'd think that no other teams exist, or at least, no other teams could possibly be in contention for a national championship. Since Ohio State doesn't seem to have what it takes to show up for the big games, I'm going to personally give USC the edge in this one. Ohio State looks sluggish and with the recent injury to Beanie Wells, it looks like they'll be short one important player. If USC wins, they will certainly be presented with the National Championship Bowl Game rose, inviting them to compete for the title. Don't be surprised to see the "collision" in the Coliseum become a collapse in the Coliseum, a disappointing end to the over-hyped frenzy building up to the game.
Showing posts with label College Football. Show all posts
Showing posts with label College Football. Show all posts
Friday, September 12, 2008
Saturday, September 6, 2008
NCAAF Week 2
If style matters in college football, and apparently it does, then Ohio State deserves a drop in the polls. I mean, come on, if Georgia can drop from its number one perch without a loss shouldn't Ohio State fall for allowing Ohio University 145 rushing yards against its defense? In this season long chase for a make-believe college football championship, a bad day should equal a drop in rankings.
Seriously, my frustration with the BCS has led me to develop a bizarre rooting system of my own. For instance, I always pull for the SEC because I was reared on the SEC, I'm a southern girl, born and bred, and I love it. That being said, because I long for the ineptness of the BCS to be revealed more and more each year, hoping in vain that someone will come to their senses and create a playoff system that matters, I usually pull against ranked teams. Why? Sheepishly, I say, I think the pollsters are a wee bit clueless in many of their rankings and rather enjoy, perhaps too much, watching that be revealed. Unless of course it is a well-deserving ranking for an SEC team. Hey, I never said it made any sense. But, let's take the example of BYU vs. Washington, I didn't really no who to root for. BYU was ranked 8th, but I like the little PAC-10/SEC rivalry that seems to have developed, so I wasn't exactly wanting Washington to win.
The point is, with the current system, it just really doesn't matter except for end-of-season bragging rights, because truth be told, fans are left feeling empty when the national champion is nothing more than a "favorite" who had a good-enough season. Without losing one game or playing a "real" opponent, Georgia lost its number one postion because it never really "had" it to begin with. Pollsters just couldn't justify placing Ohio State number one after 2 BCS Bowl defeats in a row, or a USC who lost to Stanford the previous season. Georgia had been on an end-of-season roll and had handily defeated a highly touted Hawaii team. USC pounded UVA in week one of this season, so finally, a reason to jump Georgia.
Yes, I realize that in the grand scheme of things college football matters....not at all. It is thousands of kids doing what they love for adults who, let's face it, should really get a more productive hobby. But wouldn't it be nice to give those kids, all those teams that really deserve it, a real shot at a real National Championship?
Seriously, my frustration with the BCS has led me to develop a bizarre rooting system of my own. For instance, I always pull for the SEC because I was reared on the SEC, I'm a southern girl, born and bred, and I love it. That being said, because I long for the ineptness of the BCS to be revealed more and more each year, hoping in vain that someone will come to their senses and create a playoff system that matters, I usually pull against ranked teams. Why? Sheepishly, I say, I think the pollsters are a wee bit clueless in many of their rankings and rather enjoy, perhaps too much, watching that be revealed. Unless of course it is a well-deserving ranking for an SEC team. Hey, I never said it made any sense. But, let's take the example of BYU vs. Washington, I didn't really no who to root for. BYU was ranked 8th, but I like the little PAC-10/SEC rivalry that seems to have developed, so I wasn't exactly wanting Washington to win.
The point is, with the current system, it just really doesn't matter except for end-of-season bragging rights, because truth be told, fans are left feeling empty when the national champion is nothing more than a "favorite" who had a good-enough season. Without losing one game or playing a "real" opponent, Georgia lost its number one postion because it never really "had" it to begin with. Pollsters just couldn't justify placing Ohio State number one after 2 BCS Bowl defeats in a row, or a USC who lost to Stanford the previous season. Georgia had been on an end-of-season roll and had handily defeated a highly touted Hawaii team. USC pounded UVA in week one of this season, so finally, a reason to jump Georgia.
Yes, I realize that in the grand scheme of things college football matters....not at all. It is thousands of kids doing what they love for adults who, let's face it, should really get a more productive hobby. But wouldn't it be nice to give those kids, all those teams that really deserve it, a real shot at a real National Championship?
Tuesday, September 2, 2008
NCAAF Week 1- As I See It
It seems that after a summer-long love affair with the SEC, the thrill is already gone. After last night's Tennessee loss to a PAC-10 team for the second year in-a-row, I'm sure the thrill is now probably dead. The SEC enjoyed a brief stint as media darling with 4 teams in the top 10, including Georgia's ranking of number 1, and while the rankings haven't changed much, there seems to have been a shift in the national media's attitude.
While listening to FSN radio, ESPN radio, and watching most games on various national television stations, I could hear it in the voices of the announcers as they crowned, after just 1 week of play, USC and Ohio State the most talented teams in the nation. Georgia, it seems, is headed for a fall, and over and over I heard their number 1 ranking questioned. First of all, who ranked Georgia number 1? Hmmmm.... and second, the week prior, Florida, LSU, and Georgia had all been wearing the most-talented crown. What happened in one short week? When push came to shove, was it just too difficult to truly admit that the SEC could really be the best? Florida pummeled a Hawaii team, that just the year before was in a BCS bowl. Alabama scored 34 points on the ninth ranked Clemson Tigers. Was Ohio State's 43 points over Youngstown State (aren't they a junior college) that much more impressive?
Brent Musberger, on ABC's Saturday night telecast, was saying that until proven otherwise, yes the SEC is the best conference, but he seemed to like the Big 12 to rise to the top. As he was saying this, his co-worker for the evening, Kirk Herbstreit broke the news that Arkansas State had just defeated Texas A&M. Yes, I laughed.
Look, I clearly see that Ohio State and USC are talented, clearly. But, after one week of play, why are we already ready to crown them National Champions? Have you seen Ohio State's schedule, outside of a tough match-up against USC? USC is in a PAC-10 with some talented, dangerous teams, some. UCLA showed last night that they're a team to be reckoned with. Granted, Tennessee made a few hundred foolish mistakes, but a W is a W and UCLA looked good in the second-half. I just wish we could take a more patient wait-and-see attitude with declaring teams best in the nation. Who knows when injuries can decimate a team? We've already had some scares at both Georgia and Ohio State. And based on what I saw Saturday, just on what I saw Saturday, shouldn't Florida and Alabama be in the running? It seems "until proven otherwise" the media's crush on USC and Ohio State is back on.
By the way, Auburn has some serious work to do on its offense, Again!
While listening to FSN radio, ESPN radio, and watching most games on various national television stations, I could hear it in the voices of the announcers as they crowned, after just 1 week of play, USC and Ohio State the most talented teams in the nation. Georgia, it seems, is headed for a fall, and over and over I heard their number 1 ranking questioned. First of all, who ranked Georgia number 1? Hmmmm.... and second, the week prior, Florida, LSU, and Georgia had all been wearing the most-talented crown. What happened in one short week? When push came to shove, was it just too difficult to truly admit that the SEC could really be the best? Florida pummeled a Hawaii team, that just the year before was in a BCS bowl. Alabama scored 34 points on the ninth ranked Clemson Tigers. Was Ohio State's 43 points over Youngstown State (aren't they a junior college) that much more impressive?
Brent Musberger, on ABC's Saturday night telecast, was saying that until proven otherwise, yes the SEC is the best conference, but he seemed to like the Big 12 to rise to the top. As he was saying this, his co-worker for the evening, Kirk Herbstreit broke the news that Arkansas State had just defeated Texas A&M. Yes, I laughed.
Look, I clearly see that Ohio State and USC are talented, clearly. But, after one week of play, why are we already ready to crown them National Champions? Have you seen Ohio State's schedule, outside of a tough match-up against USC? USC is in a PAC-10 with some talented, dangerous teams, some. UCLA showed last night that they're a team to be reckoned with. Granted, Tennessee made a few hundred foolish mistakes, but a W is a W and UCLA looked good in the second-half. I just wish we could take a more patient wait-and-see attitude with declaring teams best in the nation. Who knows when injuries can decimate a team? We've already had some scares at both Georgia and Ohio State. And based on what I saw Saturday, just on what I saw Saturday, shouldn't Florida and Alabama be in the running? It seems "until proven otherwise" the media's crush on USC and Ohio State is back on.
By the way, Auburn has some serious work to do on its offense, Again!
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Flawed Systems: The BCS vs. Women's Gymnastics
American television audiences sat stunned as they watched Chinese gymnast Cheng Fei take the bronze medal after crashing to her knees in the women's vault finals. A beautifully landed vault by Alicia Sacramone placed fourth. Mere hours later, we once again gasped in disbelief when Nastia Lukin lost the gold medal on uneven parallel bars to He Kexin after receiving the same score. Even if you overlook the fact that the gymnast might not even be old enough to compete in the Olympics, to the casual observer it is obvious that the scoring system contains glaring flaws. While watching the credibility of those Olympic judges tumble, I was reminded of another championship-deciding system that also carries some of the same frustrating flaws: the BCS. It seems that women's gymnastics actually does have a little something in common with college football.
In both college football and gymnastics, the past carries weight in the present. Before the first ball is snapped or the first somersault is spun, teams and athletes with past success are automatically given an advantage. USA Today's pre-season pollsters give Michigan entry into the top 25 despite the fact that they are breaking in a new coach and are recovering from some stumbles last season. Why? Because they're Michigan. Even though they've recently failed to come through when it counts, Ohio State is sitting pretty at number 2 or 3, depending on which poll you count. USC and Oklahoma are again near the top for the fifth or sixth year in a row. These rankings set up the race for the championship before nary a play is made. Those teams enter every season with a national championship advantage that is very difficult for lower teams to overcome simply because they've done well before, very often despite the previous season's performances. In women's gymnastics, judges, too, are aware of the "favorites" before the opening ceremonies are completed.
There are no tie breakers in either sport. There is no slugging it out on the field or in the gym to see who really is the team on top. For Nastia Lukin's uneven parallel bar tie, it went to the computer. Let's take away this score, throw this score in the mix, add a cup of sugar, a tablespoon of butter, and voila! looks like the Chinese gymnast comes out on top. Football is basically the same recipe. Let's take this poll, a little of that poll, a coach's vote here, a reporter's vote there, and boom! these two teams play for a National Championship. Sorry, Football U. you're schedule wasn't as "difficult" as Number One University.
Subjectivity. In sports where a championship is the goal, where one team or one person strives to prove their dominance in the sport, their unarguable, undeniable worth of being declared the best, subjectivity plays too large a role for the result to be taken seriously. There is no true number one. Pollsters decide, often disagreeing, throughout the season who should be first, second, etc. in college football. In gymnastics, judges often score the same routine with vastly differing scores, despite there being a set formula for difficulty and deductions. Human judgment decides in a big way who gets a chance to play for the prize. And as any of us who are human can tell you, it is very difficult to separate bias and emotion from our decisions no matter how hard we may try.
While I don't really care that much about women's gymnastics, other than pride in my country and a disdain for cheating in any sport regardless of who's playing, it is upsetting that there isn't a more objective scoring mechanism. How about gymnasts all do the same routine? Judges will have a consistent look at the same elements. Or perhaps judges could actually follow consistently the guidelines set for point deductions.
Now, I do care about college football and am growing weary of seeing worthy teams sitting on the sidelines watching a less worthy team play for a national championship simply because they're popular and happened to play in a conference that, let's face it, didn't prove too formidable. Popularity shouldn't decide national championships. This isn't homecoming; it's football. The BCS doesn't work. Is it going to take an undefeated USC left on the outside looking in, yet again? Or will it be Ohio State's undefeated season that leaves them playing for position number 3 in a Rose Bowl that causes those conferences who refuse to let go of the past to examine the realities of a playoff system? But hey, boys, it's the Rose Bowl....
Would the playoff solve all problems? No. But at least teams would be given an opportunity to decide it on the field and not let an objective computer filled with subjective information decide. The BCS is broken and only a real-live grind it out on the field playoff is going to fix it, IF our goal is to crown football champions and not homecoming teams.
In both college football and gymnastics, the past carries weight in the present. Before the first ball is snapped or the first somersault is spun, teams and athletes with past success are automatically given an advantage. USA Today's pre-season pollsters give Michigan entry into the top 25 despite the fact that they are breaking in a new coach and are recovering from some stumbles last season. Why? Because they're Michigan. Even though they've recently failed to come through when it counts, Ohio State is sitting pretty at number 2 or 3, depending on which poll you count. USC and Oklahoma are again near the top for the fifth or sixth year in a row. These rankings set up the race for the championship before nary a play is made. Those teams enter every season with a national championship advantage that is very difficult for lower teams to overcome simply because they've done well before, very often despite the previous season's performances. In women's gymnastics, judges, too, are aware of the "favorites" before the opening ceremonies are completed.
There are no tie breakers in either sport. There is no slugging it out on the field or in the gym to see who really is the team on top. For Nastia Lukin's uneven parallel bar tie, it went to the computer. Let's take away this score, throw this score in the mix, add a cup of sugar, a tablespoon of butter, and voila! looks like the Chinese gymnast comes out on top. Football is basically the same recipe. Let's take this poll, a little of that poll, a coach's vote here, a reporter's vote there, and boom! these two teams play for a National Championship. Sorry, Football U. you're schedule wasn't as "difficult" as Number One University.
Subjectivity. In sports where a championship is the goal, where one team or one person strives to prove their dominance in the sport, their unarguable, undeniable worth of being declared the best, subjectivity plays too large a role for the result to be taken seriously. There is no true number one. Pollsters decide, often disagreeing, throughout the season who should be first, second, etc. in college football. In gymnastics, judges often score the same routine with vastly differing scores, despite there being a set formula for difficulty and deductions. Human judgment decides in a big way who gets a chance to play for the prize. And as any of us who are human can tell you, it is very difficult to separate bias and emotion from our decisions no matter how hard we may try.
While I don't really care that much about women's gymnastics, other than pride in my country and a disdain for cheating in any sport regardless of who's playing, it is upsetting that there isn't a more objective scoring mechanism. How about gymnasts all do the same routine? Judges will have a consistent look at the same elements. Or perhaps judges could actually follow consistently the guidelines set for point deductions.
Now, I do care about college football and am growing weary of seeing worthy teams sitting on the sidelines watching a less worthy team play for a national championship simply because they're popular and happened to play in a conference that, let's face it, didn't prove too formidable. Popularity shouldn't decide national championships. This isn't homecoming; it's football. The BCS doesn't work. Is it going to take an undefeated USC left on the outside looking in, yet again? Or will it be Ohio State's undefeated season that leaves them playing for position number 3 in a Rose Bowl that causes those conferences who refuse to let go of the past to examine the realities of a playoff system? But hey, boys, it's the Rose Bowl....
Would the playoff solve all problems? No. But at least teams would be given an opportunity to decide it on the field and not let an objective computer filled with subjective information decide. The BCS is broken and only a real-live grind it out on the field playoff is going to fix it, IF our goal is to crown football champions and not homecoming teams.
Sunday, October 7, 2007
Topsy Turvy
The PAC-10's mighty roar sounds more like a meow after Stanford stunned USC Saturday night and UCLA fell victim to an, until then, WINLESS Notre Dame. Victory could not have tasted much sweeter for Les Miles, whose risky calls allowed the Tigers to eek past Florida, but we all know his grin widened when the final of the USC game was announced. LSU is undeniably the number 1 team in the nation, for now. The bigger question is, who deserves the all-important number 2 spot?
It seems that the pollsters in their infinite wisdom have crowned fellow PAC-10 rival Cal #2 in the land. Is that because they beat a mid-pack SEC team? Is it because they beat a "tough" Oregon team? Must we have a PAC-10 team in the number 2 spot because their conference has been heralded as the second toughest in the land? I know I'll be cheering for another "upset" when Cal meets USC on the field. Let's mix things up even more, shall we?
What about Ohio State? Did their 2006 championship game loss to Florida also cause them to lose their status as media darling? South Florida, anyone? They toppled the then highly-ranked West Virginia Mountaineers and an Auburn team, that seems to have finally found its rhythm.
Is there a one loss team that is more deserving of the number two spot than Cal? South Carolina looked impressive against Kentucky. If the SEC is the best conference and South Carolina's loss came to a fellow SEC team then.....? Oklahoma played well against a Texas team that struggled against a Kansas State team that, until Saturday, had been playing good football.
How tough are the Big 12, Big East, Big 10 really? Another question that must be answered before choosing for the coveted number 2. Obviously pollsters still feel that the SEC and PAC-10 are the two toughest conferences, or do they? Why did USC fall all the way to number 10? Weren't they number 2? The second best team in the country? Now they rank below West Virginia, who I don't think deserves to be ranked that highly.
In a year where so many top-ranked teams have been upset, I think all of this question asking begs an even greater question: How do we know who should fill the number 2 spot? Obviously, polls are unreliable. Why is the number 2 team on the totem poll so important? They get to play for the national championship, a championship that truly doesn't amount to much. Why, you ask? Just look at how well those human voters, entering numbers for the computer rankings, have done at picking and choosing thus far. Does anyone remember the Michigan pre-season hype???!! I think if this season has taught us anything thus far, it is that college football desperately needs a playoff. Tangible answers to hypothetical questions played out on the field, not mythical championships leaving legitimate teams on the outside looking in. But more on this later....
It seems that the pollsters in their infinite wisdom have crowned fellow PAC-10 rival Cal #2 in the land. Is that because they beat a mid-pack SEC team? Is it because they beat a "tough" Oregon team? Must we have a PAC-10 team in the number 2 spot because their conference has been heralded as the second toughest in the land? I know I'll be cheering for another "upset" when Cal meets USC on the field. Let's mix things up even more, shall we?
What about Ohio State? Did their 2006 championship game loss to Florida also cause them to lose their status as media darling? South Florida, anyone? They toppled the then highly-ranked West Virginia Mountaineers and an Auburn team, that seems to have finally found its rhythm.
Is there a one loss team that is more deserving of the number two spot than Cal? South Carolina looked impressive against Kentucky. If the SEC is the best conference and South Carolina's loss came to a fellow SEC team then.....? Oklahoma played well against a Texas team that struggled against a Kansas State team that, until Saturday, had been playing good football.
How tough are the Big 12, Big East, Big 10 really? Another question that must be answered before choosing for the coveted number 2. Obviously pollsters still feel that the SEC and PAC-10 are the two toughest conferences, or do they? Why did USC fall all the way to number 10? Weren't they number 2? The second best team in the country? Now they rank below West Virginia, who I don't think deserves to be ranked that highly.
In a year where so many top-ranked teams have been upset, I think all of this question asking begs an even greater question: How do we know who should fill the number 2 spot? Obviously, polls are unreliable. Why is the number 2 team on the totem poll so important? They get to play for the national championship, a championship that truly doesn't amount to much. Why, you ask? Just look at how well those human voters, entering numbers for the computer rankings, have done at picking and choosing thus far. Does anyone remember the Michigan pre-season hype???!! I think if this season has taught us anything thus far, it is that college football desperately needs a playoff. Tangible answers to hypothetical questions played out on the field, not mythical championships leaving legitimate teams on the outside looking in. But more on this later....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)